Interesting study of US raw/adjusted rural/urban data sets.
-
No doubt... Only have two photos on display in my apartment, and one of them is him.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
wolfbinary wrote:
Even if all this GW is a bunch of bologna, it doesn't change the fact that it is in our national security interest to stop using 19th century energy technology and start creating and using 21st century.
Such as?
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Ian Shlasko wrote:
Just don't take it seriously, or you'll be VERY disappointed.
I've read my Herodotus - that's why I didn't bother seeing the film. The trailers told me all I needed to know. ;)
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
Heh... Like I said... Mindless comic book violence. Lots of good one-liners. You've got a bunch of barbaric neanderthals that are egotistical and nigh-unstoppable warriors, a narrator that keeps going on and on about how cool they are, and a bunch of super-evil bad guys led by an androgynous emperor with a superiority complex. Basically... It's a fun popcorn flick. (Yes, it's "based" on the battle of Thermopylae, but they've taken so much creative license that you'll just be annoyed if you try to compare it to reality)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Hey, so do you think we've sufficiently hijacked this thread now? :-D
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
Yep! Think we proved a point I made earlier... This part of the thread is no longer about that stuff in the title that I won't mention :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
I could support that. The earth has a lot of oil, and even produces massive amounts of a-biotic oil, oil is the energy that will sustain us. As for as stationary energy systems such as the pwergrid, we need to use nuclear (and hydro wherever available). The technology has advanced enough for it to be safe. Protable energy will remain oil based until we develop alternitive systsms that are cheaper and allow us to reiul like we do now.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Heh... Like I said... Mindless comic book violence. Lots of good one-liners. You've got a bunch of barbaric neanderthals that are egotistical and nigh-unstoppable warriors, a narrator that keeps going on and on about how cool they are, and a bunch of super-evil bad guys led by an androgynous emperor with a superiority complex. Basically... It's a fun popcorn flick. (Yes, it's "based" on the battle of Thermopylae, but they've taken so much creative license that you'll just be annoyed if you try to compare it to reality)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Ian Shlasko wrote:
You've got a bunch of barbaric neanderthals that are egotistical and nigh-unstoppable warriors, a narrator that keeps going on and on about how cool they are, and a bunch of super-evil bad guys led by an androgynous emperor with a superiority complex.
So it's like an NFL game involving the Raiders? :-D
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
-
I could support that. The earth has a lot of oil, and even produces massive amounts of a-biotic oil, oil is the energy that will sustain us. As for as stationary energy systems such as the pwergrid, we need to use nuclear (and hydro wherever available). The technology has advanced enough for it to be safe. Protable energy will remain oil based until we develop alternitive systsms that are cheaper and allow us to reiul like we do now.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
As for as stationary energy systems such as the pwergrid, we need to use nuclear (and hydro wherever available). The technology has advanced enough for it to be safe. Protable energy will remain oil based until we develop alternitive systsms that are cheaper and allow us to reiul like we do now.
What the... Who are you, and what have you done with CSS?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Umm... Dunno... I don't watch sports :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
Ian Shlasko wrote:
You've got a bunch of barbaric neanderthals that are egotistical and nigh-unstoppable warriors, a narrator that keeps going on and on about how cool they are, and a bunch of super-evil bad guys led by an androgynous emperor with a superiority complex.
So it's like an NFL game involving the Raiders? :-D
L u n a t i c F r i n g e
Umm... Dunno... I don't watch sports :)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
:)
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
As for as stationary energy systems such as the pwergrid, we need to use nuclear (and hydro wherever available). The technology has advanced enough for it to be safe. Protable energy will remain oil based until we develop alternitive systsms that are cheaper and allow us to reiul like we do now.
What the... Who are you, and what have you done with CSS?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)Dear Sir we have CSS, at present he is safe but unless you bring us a peperoni pizza and diet coke in 30 minutes this could change Many thanks GW - Discover Channel
As barmey as a sack of badgers Dude, if I knew what I was doing in life, I'd be rich, retired, dating a supermodel and laughing at the rest of you from the sidelines.
-
Dear Sir we have CSS, at present he is safe but unless you bring us a peperoni pizza and diet coke in 30 minutes this could change Many thanks GW - Discover Channel
As barmey as a sack of badgers Dude, if I knew what I was doing in life, I'd be rich, retired, dating a supermodel and laughing at the rest of you from the sidelines.
It could change? If I send the pizza and coke, do you promise NOT to release him?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
It could change? If I send the pizza and coke, do you promise NOT to release him?
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)I'll agree to these terms on one condition! you keep fat_boy
As barmey as a sack of badgers Dude, if I knew what I was doing in life, I'd be rich, retired, dating a supermodel and laughing at the rest of you from the sidelines.
-
I'll agree to these terms on one condition! you keep fat_boy
As barmey as a sack of badgers Dude, if I knew what I was doing in life, I'd be rich, retired, dating a supermodel and laughing at the rest of you from the sidelines.
Never! We will not negotiate with terrorists!
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
fat_boy wrote:
Free of mans influence
What about land clearing in rural areas? Just because it's not a city doesn't mean it hasn't been dug up, deforested, dammed or otherwise plundered, possibly for generations. Who's to say what effects those things might have on the data recorded? Any why is 'data manipulation' limited to data recorded in urban areas? Sounds like a load of shit to me.
Josh Gray wrote:
What about land clearing in rural areas?
That would come under the banner or urbanisation. By rural I mean stations in areas that have been unaffected by urbanisaiton. For example many stations are near houses since they are maintained by individals. But, provided in the life of that station data there hasnt been increased urbanisation in the vicinity of the station then its data can be said to be free of urbanisaiton even if it is in an urban area.
Josh Gray wrote:
Any why is 'data manipulation' limited to data recorded in urban areas?
Take a look at the link, it isnt.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
So data that avoids the city heat island effect, not data that is influenced by man. That makes more sense. That said, it is possible to compensate for the heat island effect, and as far as I remember is typically done when doing anything of real value. Typically the stations are used more for the differential of temperature rather than the direct temperature, again, in items that are of any real value, so none of the studies you read about in the news are terribly likely to qualify there.
Distind wrote:
So data that avoids the city heat island effect, not data that is influenced by man. That makes more sense.
Precisely. And because it is freed of ans effect through urbanisaiton it doesnt need manipulation and can be used raw. This removes any errors, intentional or not, from the resulting data set. Show me a graph of that which shows highly unusual warming and I will jon the blams CO2 group because it would be significantly outside natural variability.
Distind wrote:
That said, it is possible to compensate for the heat island effect
Why not avoid all adjustments by using raw rural data? But take a look at the link of mine and see just what is done to the raw temperature record in the US. Its quite disturbing.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
I think I got it, the whole heat island effect, and his assumption that any compensation for it will be done in such a way to skew the data towards the assumed interests of the climate scientists. If there's anything else to it I'm going to have to say it's all a load of cow flatulence, as well... there's still cow flatulence to deal with in rural areas. Produces both CO2 and heat mind you.
Distind wrote:
I think I got it, the whole heat island effect, and his assumption that any compensation for it will be done in such a way to skew the data towards the assumed interests of the climate scientists.
Spot on. Take a look at the link. It will show you exactly what is being done to the data and what results this gives.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Distind wrote:
So data that avoids the city heat island effect, not data that is influenced by man. That makes more sense.
Precisely. And because it is freed of ans effect through urbanisaiton it doesnt need manipulation and can be used raw. This removes any errors, intentional or not, from the resulting data set. Show me a graph of that which shows highly unusual warming and I will jon the blams CO2 group because it would be significantly outside natural variability.
Distind wrote:
That said, it is possible to compensate for the heat island effect
Why not avoid all adjustments by using raw rural data? But take a look at the link of mine and see just what is done to the raw temperature record in the US. Its quite disturbing.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Why not avoid all adjustments by using raw rural data? But take a look at the link of mine and see just what is done to the raw temperature record in the US. Its quite disturbing.
Because it's not just rural data that matters. With any warming Cities are likely to be the worst effected by it due to their increased heat already? And do we honestly have people using the raw data from urban centers despite the known discrepancy? I find that hard to believe in, as I've been stressing, legitimate studies.
-
fat_boy wrote:
Why not avoid all adjustments by using raw rural data? But take a look at the link of mine and see just what is done to the raw temperature record in the US. Its quite disturbing.
Because it's not just rural data that matters. With any warming Cities are likely to be the worst effected by it due to their increased heat already? And do we honestly have people using the raw data from urban centers despite the known discrepancy? I find that hard to believe in, as I've been stressing, legitimate studies.
Distind wrote:
Because it's not just rural data that matters. With any warming Cities are likely to be the worst effected by it due to their increased heat already?
I thought you understood me on this. The reason for using only raw rural data is to get a true indication of what temperatures are doing without having to make any adjustments. Of course cites will be affected. In fact they already are. Tokyo is 12 degres warmer then the surrounding countryside for example. London is 5 degrees warmer. But that warming isnt caused by CO2, its because concrete and asphelt is a good heat sink so if we remove those factors we can more clearly see what CO2 is doing to temperatures.
Distind wrote:
And do we honestly have people using the raw data from urban centers despite the known discrepancy? I find that hard to believe in, as I've been stressing, legitimate studies.
I ask you to read the link and see for yourself.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Unfortunately its only the US, I would like to see a global verison. But the US data does have quality, longevity and extent in its favour so it is a valid snap shot and representetive of much of the northen hemisphere. http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/Rate_of_Temp_Change_Raw_and_Adjusted_NCDC_Data.pdf[^] Free of mans influence of course the true temperature of the US is figure 4, the raw rural data. This clearly demonstrates that the adjustments applied by NOAA GISS and CRUT add a great deal of warming to the rural data set for the recent period and fail to adjust for urban growth in the urban data. Both of which give a false warming signal. Now you can see why I am suspicious when I hear GISS or NOAA stating that some month or year is the hottest on record. If we had a true global raw rural data set we would have an accurate view of temperatures and untill we do we have no hope of determining how much warming is due to man made CO2 and how much is due to natural variation. I can almost hear the cries of 'how about other indicating factors, sea level, arctic sea ice, glaciers'. Irrelevant. CO2 does not directly cause the arctic to melt. Or diectly cause sea levels to rise. It is supposed to raise temperatures. And untill we have an accurate understanding of that any other issues are irrelevant.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
My first question about this analysis is why in the world would you arbitrarily choose to select a station from within each state? What doe state boundaries have to do with temperature change? This type of analysis would heavily favor the coastal areas between DC and Massachusetts. To show that, here's a map of the stations that were selected: http://yfrog.com/n5tempstationsp[^] Brown points are rural. Green are urban. Now I have another question regarding the selection of stations. Obviously, you would want some randomization, but the author has already decided to arbitrarily favor temperatures east of the Mississippi. (Those stations represent approximately 56% of the sample but only 24% of the land mass of the 48 contiguous states.) So why not make sure that your urban stations accurately represent urban areas. In California, the station is towards the edge of the LA-Long Beach urban area instead of near the center where presumably the temperature change would be greatest. In Oregon, the station is in Astoria (though not technically within the city boundaries) which has a population density of about 255 people per square mile whereas Portland has a density of about 3300 people per square mile. In Texas, the station is in Corpus Christi, which does have a high population density (about 2700 people per square mile) but an overall small area and the site itself is in a tract that is not representative of Corpus Christi (the tract has a density of 189 people per square mile). In Colorado, the station is in Montrose, which is all of 11 square miles big and has a population of 15k whereas Denver has 503 square miles and about 2 million people. This is true throughout the stations with a few exceptions: Washington's is in Seattle, SC's is in Columbia and Wisconsin's is in Milwaukee. My point is that no analysis is really going to get at the answer. Personally, I don't know how NCDC and GISS are calculating temperature, but throwing out the work of so many scientists because you don't like the results is IMO a bit naive. We all know that when we approach anything, we bring our own biases into the analysis of the data and the discussions that follow. The SPPI is clearly an anti-GW group and it is not surprising that they have published another paper against it. Personally, I have no idea of the best way to measure global temperatures. You'd have to be able t